PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

projectriver said:
Yes I think the charge is far more than who paid for the contractual requirement. It is an allegation that the contract was not as disclosed or as was found in the club's accounts. On sponsorship, I think this is simply a re-run of UEFA/CAS presented with more disclosure and a second bite.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I still struggle with that as an accountant but I am, as everyone tells me, no lawyer :)
 
projectriver said:
Yes I think the charge is far more than who paid for the contractual requirement. It is an allegation that the contract was not as disclosed or as was found in the club's accounts. On sponsorship, I think this is simply a re-run of UEFA/CAS presented with more disclosure and a second bite.
Click to expand...
Why would a legal firm advise their client that they have a reasonable chance of winning given this and the previous CAS decision in our favour?

Significant new evidence?

A lower bar of proof set given that it’s a PL appeal panel?

Is it just that Lawyers will say anything as long as they get paid?

All of the above?
 
Cobwebcat said:
Why would a legal firm advise their client that they have a reasonable chance of winning given this and the previous CAS decision in our favour?

Significant new evidence?

A lower bar of proof set given that it’s a PL appeal panel?

Is it just that Lawyers will say anything as long as they get paid?

All of the above?
Click to expand...
  1. Not impossible
  2. Definitely PL will hope for more documentary evidence
  3. Not a materially lower bar
  4. Lawyers are not infallible (my views here https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/business-of-sport/arid-41072465.html)
  5. Some of the above
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
It all points to the PL repeating the mistakes of UEFA and making allegations against City with little or no evidence. The main purpose of this witchunt has been to undermine City driven by a hostile (and in come cases racist) media.
We still don't know why the PL would put its own reputation at risk to do this. When Richard Masters came in he had an opportinity to review this politically-motivated investigation and find a way to stop it and save some face.
Instead he chose to go nuclear. It's not clear why he did this but you can only assume he was under severe pressure from the Directors at MUFC and LFC who actually vetted his appointment. We still don't know why three other candidates (who were offered the PL job) pulled out. Perhaps part of the deal with Masters was that a condition of taking the job was that "he should do something about City." Something smells about the entire case.
Click to expand...

Maybe the club should ask for the minutes of the meetings between Masters and MUFC and Masters and LFC to establish if there was any pressure on Masters to represent their interests above those of the PL? Would be fun.
 
halfcenturyup said:
But I would imagine it's almost suicidal professionally to make charges like that if they can't prove them? I can't imagine that even the PL is that stupid. Strike that, maybe I can.
Click to expand...
They can feel confident. They can underestimate the practical and commercial reality. They can believe a panel will see it like them. All litigators have lost cases they thought they would win. But that cuts both ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.